alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1210-AB32-2-1217.html[7/24/2015 8:30:04 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvs-yukf

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1712

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Deborah Barnes

General Comment

I believe that for 50 some odd years that I have been taking care of myself and my family without any assistance

 freom the government, that I can handle my own retirement. I wonder where all of this will end. Wake up

 people!!
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 160 (Monday, August 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 56911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17950]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12157]


Charter Renewal, Foreign Affairs Policy Board

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et 
seq., and 41 CFR 102-3.65, the Department of State hereby provides 
notice of the renewal of the charter of the Foreign Affairs Policy 
Board (``the Board'').
    The Foreign Affairs Policy Board provides the Secretary of State 
with advice, feedback, and perspectives from a diverse array of experts 
to advance the Department's mission and help root American foreign 
policy in the needs and aspirations of the American people.
    The Board's activities are advisory only. The Board is established 
under the general authority of the Secretary of State and the 
Department of State as set forth in title 22 of the United States Code, 
in particular section 2656 of that Title and consistent with Federal 
Advisory Committee Act.
    For additional information, contact Leslie Thompson in the Office 
of Policy Planning, U.S. Department of State, at email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95c1fdfaf8e5e6fafbd9a7d5e6e1f4e1f0bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fca89493918c8f9392b0cebc8f889d8899d29b938a">[email protected]</span></a> or phone 202-341-4949.

Salman Ahmed,
Director, Office of Policy Planning, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-17950 Filed 8-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Dearborn *v.*Nelson, *Adm'r.*

Tho assignee of a non-nogotiable right of action takes it subject to the legal defences, including set-off, that exist at the time of the assignment.

The foreclosure of a mortgage operates as payment of the mortgage debt to the value of the property obtained by the foreclosure.

The value of the property may be shown in a subsequent suit brought to recover the mortgage debt, or a suit in which the debt is set up as a defence in set-off.

Assumpsit, for usurious interest received by Berry, the defendant’s intestate, from the plaintiff. Facts found by a referee. The plaintiff, having paid Berry more than six per cent, interest on notes given for hired money, made an assignment of his claim against Berry’s estate for the usury; and this suit is brought for the benefit of the assignee. At the time of the assignment, the defendant, as administrator, held two of the notes, and they had not been paid. They were originally secured by mortgages, which have been foreclosed on land of less value than the amounts of the debts. In a suit brought on one of the notes, cattle were attached and sold by the officer, against whom suits have been brought by the plaintiff. These suits and negotiations for their settlement are pending; and the referee is of opinion that a compromise will be effected that will include the note.

*II. P. llo/fe,*for the plaintiff.

*Shirley Sf*Carr, for the defendant.

The defendant could have maintained an action on the notes and another action on each mortgage at the same time, but could have but one satisfaction of *250each debt. Foreclosure pays the mortgage debt to the extent of the value of the property. *Took*v. Hartley, 2 Dick. 785; *Amory*v. Fairbanks, 3 Mass. 562; *Newall*v. Wright, 3 Mass. 150 ; *Briggs*v. Richmond, 10 Pick. 396; West v. Chamberlin, 8 Pick. 338; *Hatch*v. White, 2 Gall. 154; *Omaly*v. *Swan,*3 Mason 474; *Leland*v. *Loring,*10 Met. 125; *Dunkley*v. Van *Buren,*3 Johns. Ch. 330 ; *Globe Insurance Co.*v. *Lansing,*5 Cow. 380; *Lansing*v. *Goelet,*9 Cow. 346; *Spencer*v. *Harford,*4 Wend. 385; *Hunt*v. *Stiles,*10 N. H. 466; *Smith*v. *Packard,*19 N. H. 575; Cross v. *Gannett,*39 N. H. 140; *Brown*v. *Simons,*45 N. H. 212; *Green*v. *Cross,*45 N. H. 574, 576.

Doe, C. J.

The assignee of the plaintiff’s non-negotiable right of action took it subject to the legal defences existing at the time of the assignment. His acquisition of an equitable right did not extinguish or avoid the defendant’s equitable set-off. *Sanborn*v. *Little,*3 N. H. 539; *Wiggin*v. *Damrell,*4 N. H. 69; *Duncklee*v. *G. S. M. Co.,*23 N. H. 245; *Thompson*v. *Emery,*27 N. H. 269. The foreclosure of the mortgages operated as payment of the mortgage debts to the value of the property obtained by the foreclosure. The amount of the payments thus received may be found in this suit. The pending negotiations for a settlement are not a payment or discharge of the debt.

*Case discharged.*

Stanley, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
From: Tim Mays [mailto:patriotfinancial@charter.net] 

Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:22 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: Fiduciary Rule / Objection

Department of Labor,

I am a financial services professional of 39 years. 14 years as a banker, and 25 years as an insurance 

agent, working primarily in life insurance and annuity contracts. I have always placed my client’s needs 

and concerns first; therefore, I do not need some rule or law forced on me, to tell me to do what I have 

always done. The DOL proposed fiduciary rule, is simply an open invitation to the legal community, to 

sue countless financial professionals for something that they did not do. They are already doing this very 

thing in the medical profession, because we see their advertisement daily. This is exactly what will 

happen to financial professionals if this rule is imposed! It will drive a lot of professionals from the 

business, and errors and omissions premiums will skyrocket, just like malpractice insurance has done for 

the medical profession. 

In addition, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, have required Suitability Profiles, for 

annuity contracts, already, and each individual insurance commissioner has the right to sanction agents 

when rules are not followed, or are breached, or the client’s interest is not best served. Our economy is 

already stifled due to government regulation; therefore, we do not need more regulation. I encourage 

you to drop this Fiduciary Rule Proposal.

C. Tim Mays, CLU, ChFC

C. Tim Mays, CLU, ChFC

Agent / Financial Practitioner

President 

Patriot Financial Group, Inc.

608 1st. Ave. N.

Conover, NC 28613 

(828) 632-1911 office main / 866-460-0413 office toll free / 828-635-0033 office fax / 828-308-5574 cell phone

Specialists: Life Insurance / Annuities / Safe Retirement Solutions / Retirement Accumulation and Lifetime 

Income Distribution Planning / Long Term Care Insurance / Disability Insurance / Medicare Supplement 

Insurance 

“Confidentiality Notice: This email transmission and its attachments, if any, are confidential and intended only for the use of particular persons 

and entities. They may also be work product and/or protected by the attorney-client privilege or other privileges. Delivery to someone other 

than the intended recipient(s) shall not be deemed to waive any privilege. Review, distribution, storage, transmittal or other use of the email 

and any attachment by an unintended recipient is expressly prohibited. If you are not the named addressee (or its agent) or this email has been 

addressed to you in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and permanently delete the email and its attachments.”

If you wish to be removed from our e-mail list just write me at PatriotFinancial@charter.net.
Editorial Note on Part 397
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 397 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 397.73 Public information and reporting requirements. ( a ) Public information. Information on NRHM routing designations must be made available by the States and Indian tribes to the public in the form of maps, lists, road signs or some combination thereof. If road signs are used, those signs and their placements must comply with the provisions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), particularly the Hazardous Cargo signs identified as R14-2 and R14-3 shown in Section 2B-62 of that Manual. This publication may be accessed free of charge on the Internet at *http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ .*
( b ) *Reporting and publishing requirements.* ( 1 ) Each State or Indian tribe, through its routing agency, shall provide information identifying all NRHM routing designations that exist within its jurisdiction: ( i ) Electronically, by email to *HMRouting@dot.gov*; or
( ii ) By mail to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Office of Enforcement and Compliance (MC-SE), 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
( 2 ) States and Indian tribes shall also submit to FMCSA the current name of the State or Indian tribal agency responsible for NHRM highway routing designations. The State or Indian tribe shall include descriptions of these routing designations, along with the dates they were established. Information on any subsequent changes or new NRHM routing designations shall be furnished within 60 days after establishment to the FMCSA.
( 3 ) ( i ) FMCSA will consolidate information on the NRHM routing designations, make it available on its website, *https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hazardous-materials/national-hazardous-materials-route-registry ,* and publish it annually in whole or as updates in the Federal Register.
( ii ) Each State or Indian tribe may also publish this information in its official register of State or tribal regulations.
( c ) A State or Tribally-designated route is effective only after it is published in the National Hazardous Materials Route Registry on FMCSA's website at *https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hazardous-materials/national-hazardous-materials-route-registry*.
[79 FR 59457, Oct. 2, 2014, as amended at 81 FR 68358, Oct. 4, 2016; 83 FR 22881, May 17, 2018; 83 FR 48726, Sept. 27, 2018; 87 FR 59037, Sept. 29, 2022]
OST-2010-0046 

USDOT Secretary 

Dear Sir: 

Keep Mercer county in Mounta. 

n A iMi' 

will have misery in Central time 

in Time, It IS our choice for our lives. We 

Rural Resident 

Mercer County
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 September 24, 2014

h0917

Order 

Clerk

September 24, 2014

148531

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148531

COA: 318145

Genesee CC: 12-030097-FC

KRISTOPHER KYLE McCHESTER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 2, 2014 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for 

consideration, as on leave granted, of whether the defendant is entitled to resentencing 

based on a misscoring of Offense Variable (OV) 4 (psychological injury to victim), MCL 

777.34. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We further DIRECT the Court of Appeals to REMAND this case first to the 

Genesee Circuit Court, in accordance with Administrative Order 2003-03, so that the 

circuit court can determine whether the defendant is indigent and, if so, to appoint 

counsel to represent the defendant in the Court of Appeals.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 8/19/15 

Received: August 17, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8klx-3hfh

Comments Due: August 28, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule- Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-4950

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: James Zervogiannis

General Comment

I am concerned about the Department of Labor's Proposed Rule on Fiduciary Duty (the Proposal) 

to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The trusted relationship between Americans 

and their financial advisor is vital, and government shouldn't make it harder for people to save 

for retirement. I urge you to:

-Call for additional Congressional hearings to fully examine the real and unintended 

consequences that this Proposal would have on consumers; 

-Explore and support a bipartisan legislative solution that effectively combines a best interest 

standard with a practical exemption from the prohibited transaction rules under the Proposal; and 

-Work with investment advisors, consumers, and various regulators to regulate retirement 

savings in a way that doesn't limit consumer choice but ensures a full range of advice is available 

to meet a retiree's financial goals. 

Consumers deserve access to education, planning, advice and product solutions as they prepare 

for retirement. However, this Proposal is too burdensome and would have significant impacts on 

consumers, including:

-Discouraging saving for retirement: By reducing access to personalized and holistic financial 

advice, the Proposal would shift the burden of complex retirement planning onto the very 
individuals the rules are trying to protect.

-Preventing people from gaining the peace of mind they need in retirement: By discouraging 

advisors from offering individuals many types of lifetime income guarantees that provide a 

steady stream of income throughout retirement.

-Preventing small businesses from taking care of their employees: By discouraging many smallbusiness owners from offering IRA plans.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter and helping to ensure the full range of 

financial advice continues to be available to all Americans.

Sincerely,

James Zervogiannis

Financial Advisor, Michigan
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**Certification of Periodic Financial Report byChief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

I, Dennis E. Young, ExecutiveVice President and Chief Financial Officer of Wells Fargo Financial, Inc. (the“Company”), certify that:

 

(1)                                  theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10–Q for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2002 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Dennis E. Young          |   |
|--------|------------------------------|--------|
|   | Dennis E. Young              |
|   | Executive Vice President and |
|   | Chief Financial Officer      |
|   | Wells Fargo Financial, Inc.  |
|   | November 12, 2002            |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 294 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 294

Expressing the gratitude of the House of Representatives to the General 
Accounting Office and its employees for enabling the House to continue 
   its work while the House office buildings were closed due to the 
                          presence of Anthrax.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 27, 2001

Mr. Ney (for himself, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Hastert, Mr. Gephardt, Mr. Ehlers, 
    Mr. Fattah, Mr. Linder, Mr. Davis of Florida, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. 
Doolittle, and Mrs. Biggert) submitted the following resolution; which 
         was referred to the Committee on House Administration
                           November 27, 2001
    Committee on House Administration discharged; considered under 
                 suspension of the rules and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the gratitude of the House of Representatives to the General 
Accounting Office and its employees for enabling the House to continue 
   its work while the House office buildings were closed due to the 
                          presence of Anthrax.

Whereas the House of Representatives recently found it necessary to close its 
        office buildings to Members, staff, and the public due to the presence 
        of Anthrax;
Whereas the Comptroller General made an offer to the House of Representatives to 
        make the General Accounting Office's building and equipment available to 
        the Members and staff of the House of Representatives during the period 
        in which the House office buildings were closed, an offer the House 
        gratefully accepted;
Whereas the House's subsequent temporary use of General Accounting Office 
        workspaces, telephones, computers, and other equipment imposed an 
        inconvenience on the employees of the Office, who graciously vacated 
        their worksites; and
Whereas the sacrifices made by employees of the General Accounting Office during 
        this period enabled the House of Representatives to continue its 
        legislative work on behalf of the people of the United States: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives expresses its gratitude 
to the General Accounting Office for accommodating the House during the 
recent closure of the House office buildings, and sincerely thanks the 
hundreds of General Accounting Office employees who generously vacated 
their workspaces and otherwise helped to make it possible for the work 
of the House to continue during this period.
    Sec. 2. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall transmit a 
copy of this resolution to the Comptroller General of the United 
States.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 14, 2018

No. 04-16-00648-CR

Darrel K. BOWSER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR5005

Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

This court heard oral argument in this appeal on February 28, 2018, and the appeal was 

submitted. On March 7, 2018, Appellant filed a motion to file a supplemental brief and the 

supplemental brief itself. 

Appellant’s motion to file a supplemental brief is GRANTED; the supplemental brief is 

accepted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.7.

PER CURIAM

It is so ORDERED on March 12, 2018.

ATTESTED TO: ___________________________________

 Keith E. Hottle

 Clerk of Court
<PAGE>   1
                                                                Exhibit 10.5



                              COGNITRONICS CORPORATION

                             1998 EXECUTIVE BONUS PLAN





Participants:President, Vice President - Sales, Vice President - Engineering, 
Vice President - Manufacturing and Treasurer

The bonus pool is to be calculated as follows:


Range of Operating Income(1)                 Bonus Pool
 Under $2.5 million                     4% of Operating Income
 $2.51 million to $5 million            $100,000 plus 6% of Operating Income
                                          in excess of $2.5 million
 $5.01 million $7.5 million             $250,000 plus 8% of Operating Income
                                          in excess of $5 million
 $7.51 million and over                 $450,000 plus 10% of Operating Income
                                          in excess of $7.5 million

The bonus pool is to be allocated among the participants by the Compensation 
Committee after reviewing the written recommendations of the President.

(1) Operating Income for Part A is consolidated income before income taxes 
exclusive of executive bonus expense and special or non-recurring income or 
expense.
From: Jim Mainzer [mailto:jmainzer@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 2:30 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

Dear Sir:

Please DO NOT eliminate my ability to write covered calls and cash covered puts within my 

IRA!

There is almost no difference if I put a sell order in at a certain price vs selling a covered call at 

that same price. The only difference is that I either sell the stock at the call price or I get to keep 

the money generated by the call. If I put a sell order in all I can get is a sale at the limit price. In 

essence this rule deprives me of income. Likewise, when I sell a cash covered put I receive a 

premium for covering the downside of a given security. The worst that can happen is that I buy 

the stock with a net lower cost or I keep the revenue generated by the put because the stock didn't 

go down.

Covered calls and cash covered puts are conservative investment vehicles that SHOULD NOT 

be prohibited within an IRA.

Jim Mainzer
#### § 29.405 When must the Department transfer funds for a discretionary or competitive grant?

If the Department selects a Tribe for a discretionary or competitive grant, and the Tribe elects to include the grant funds in its funding agreement, the Department will transfer the funds to the Tribe in accordance with the terms of the Notice of Funding Opportunity or as the Department and the Tribe may otherwise agree. The Department will transfer these funds no later than 10 days after the Department and the Tribe execute a funding agreement or an amendment covering the grant, unless the funding agreement provides otherwise. Consistent with the Prompt Payment Act, the Department is not responsible for any interest penalty if the Department makes the transfer within 30 days.
From: Ray Spatti [mailto:ray.spatti@gmail.com] 

Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:17 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: I support DOL Fiduciary Rule

As a licensed insurance agent for the past 12 years,

I strongly urge DOL to IMPLEMENT THE FIDUCIARY RULE.

Agents who oppose it because they do not want to be held to it.

Raymond Spatti

Payson, Arizona